Defining high HIV incidence subgroups of Australian homosexual men: implications for conducting HIV prevention trials in low HIV prevalence settings.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess whether subpopulations with sufficiently high HIV incidences for HIV prevention trials can be identified in low HIV incidence settings such as Australia. METHODS: In a community-based cohort study of HIV-negative homosexually active men in Sydney, Australia, potential risk factors associated with an annual HIV incidence of ≥2 per 100 person-years (PY) were identified. A stepwise procedure ranked these factors according to HIV incidence, to create a 'high-incidence' subgroup of participants. Willingness to participate in HIV prevention trials was assessed. RESULTS: Although the incidence in the cohort overall was only 0.78 per 100 PY, nine risk variables were associated with an HIV incidence of 2 per 100 PY or greater. Stepwise inclusion of these variables revealed a 'high-incidence' subgroup of men representing 24% of the total follow-up time with a combined HIV incidence of 2.71 per 100 PY, who reported at least one of three risk factors in the past 6 months. These men were more willing than others to participate in vaccine and antiretroviral therapy HIV prevention trials. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that it is possible to identify high HIV incidence subpopulations in low-incidence settings such as Australia, and these men are of above average willingness to participate in HIV prevention trials.

Attitudes towards new HIV biomedical prevention technologies among a cohort of HIV-negative gay men in Sydney, Australia.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to explore the awareness of rectal microbicides, the use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PREP) and the willingness to participate in biomedical HIV prevention trials in a cohort of HIV-negative gay men. METHODS: In a community-based cohort study, HIV-negative homosexually active men in Sydney, Australia were questioned about awareness of rectal microbicides, use of PREP, and willingness to participate in trials of such products. Predictors of awareness and willingness to participate were analysed by logistic regression. Use of PREP was examined prospectively. RESULTS: Overall, 14% had heard of rectal microbicides. Older (P=0.05) and university-educated men (P=0.001) were more likely to have knowledge of rectal microbicides. Almost one-quarter (24%) of men reported that they were likely/very likely to participate in rectal microbicide trials. Among those men with definite opinions on participation, awareness of rectal microbicides was significantly associated with unwillingness to participate [odds ratio (OR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.93, P=0.007]. Willingness to participate in trials using antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) to prevent HIV infection was reported by 43% of men, and was higher among those who reported unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with HIV-positive partners (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.99-3.56). There was no evidence of current PREP use. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that Australian gay men have had little experience with PREP use and rectal microbicides. About half would be willing to consider participation in trials using ARVs to prevent HIV infection. Extensive community education and consultation would be required before PREP or rectal microbicides could be trialled in populations of gay Australian men.

Testing for HIV and sexually transmissible infections within a mainly online sample of gay men who engage in group sex.

INTRODUCTION: Group sex among gay men has been associated with other HIV risk behaviours. Gay men who engage in group sex may be at increased risk of infection with HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STI). METHODS: The Three or More Study (TOMS) of group sex among gay men utilised an anonymous, self-completed survey about participants' most recent occasion of group sex with other men and in-depth interviews with a small number of these survey participants. The 436 men who reported having engaged in group sex within the previous month were included in these analyses. RESULTS: Among 436 men who engaged in group sex within the previous month, 32.5% reported unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with non-regular, mostly HIV non-seroconcordant partners at this recent group sex encounter (GSE) and the majority reported other sex practices that are risk factors for STI other than HIV. Over one-third reported having been tested for HIV or other STI since their last GSE; those who had engaged in UAI at the GSE were more likely to have been tested (p = 0.008). Men who had a doctor with whom they were able to discuss their group sex activities had received a broader range of STI tests (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Sex practices that risk the transmission of STI were common within this high-risk sample, whereas awareness of risk and the need for testing was high but not universal. Frank discussion with doctors of patients' group sex behaviour also enhanced decisions about adequate testing. Gay men in group sex networks are an appropriate priority for sexual health screening.

Prevalence, incidence and risk factors for pharyngeal chlamydia in the community based Health in Men (HIM) cohort of homosexual men in Sydney, Australia.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence, incidence and risk factors for pharyngeal Chlamydia trachomatis in the community based Health in Men (HIM) cohort of HIV negative homosexual men in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: From January 2003, all HIM participants were offered annual screening for pharyngeal chlamydia using BD ProbeTec nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT). Detailed sexual behavioural data were collected every 6 months, and risk factors for infection and hazard ratios were calculated using Cox regression. RESULTS: Among 1427 participants enrolled, the prevalence of pharyngeal chlamydia on initial testing was 1.06% and the incidence rate was 0.58 per 100 person-years. More than 50% of all infections were identified on baseline testing and 68% of men with pharyngeal infection had no evidence of concurrent anogenital chlamydia. There was no association of pharyngeal chlamydia with sore throat. Infection was significantly associated with increasing frequency of receptive penile-oral sex with ejaculation with casual partners (p = 0.009), although approximately half of infections occurred in participants not reporting this risk behaviour. Neither kissing nor oro-anal practices were associated with infection. CONCLUSION: The incidence of pharyngeal chlamydia infection in the HIM study was relatively low; however, the relatively high prevalence on baseline testing compared to incidence suggests a long duration of infection. Occasional screening for pharyngeal chlamydia in homosexual men who frequently practise receptive oral sex with ejaculation may be warranted.

Self-report is a valid measure of circumcision status in homosexual men.

OBJECTIVE: Misreporting of circumcision status may affect observed relationships between circumcision status and HIV or other sexually transmissible infections. As no data exist on the validity of self-reported circumcision status among homosexual men, we investigated the agreement between self-report and examination findings in a subgroup of participants in the Health in Men (HIM) study in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: A subgroup of 240 participants in the community based HIM cohort study attending annual interview agreed to a brief genital examination by a trained study nurse who was unaware of their previous self-reported circumcision status. RESULTS: Five participants reported being uncircumcised at baseline but were classified as circumcised on examination. All participants who self-reported being circumcised were found on examination to be circumcised. Three cases in which the examining study nurse was unsure of participants' circumcision status were excluded. Of the remaining 237 participants, 155 (65.4%) were classified as circumcised on examination, including five men who self identified as uncircumcised. Compared with examination, self-reported circumcision status resulted in a sensitivity of 96.8%, specificity of 100%, positive predictive value of 100% and negative predictive value of 94.3%. The overall agreement between circumcision status on examination and self-report was 97.9% (kappa score, 0.95; p<0.001) CONCLUSION: Self-report was a valid measure of circumcision status in this group of predominantly Anglo gay-community-attached men. We believe our findings can be generalised to similarly aged gay-community-attached men in other developed countries.

Incidence and risk factors for urethral and anal gonorrhoea and chlamydia in a cohort of HIV-negative homosexual men: the Health in Men Study.

BACKGROUND: Early detection and treatment of bacterial sexually transmitted infections has been advocated as an HIV prevention strategy. AIM: To inform screening guidelines, the incidence and risk factors for urethral and anal gonorrhoea and chlamydia were studied in a prospective cohort of community-based HIV negative homosexual men in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. METHODS: All participants were offered annual screening for gonorrhoea and chlamydia (study-visit diagnoses) on urine and anal swabs using nucleic acid amplification. Participants also reported diagnoses of gonorrhoea and chlamydia made elsewhere between interviews (interval diagnoses). All diagnoses were summed to create a combined incidence rate, and detailed data on specific sexual practices with casual and regular partners were collected. RESULTS: Among 1427 men enrolled, the combined incidence rates were 3.49 and 2.96 per 100 person-years for urethral and anal gonorrhoea, respectively; and 7.43 and 4.98 per 100 person-years for urethral and anal chlamydia, respectively. Urethral infections were associated with unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with HIV-positive partners (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 6.05 for urethral gonorrhoea) and with frequent insertive oral sex (p for trend 0.007 for urethral chlamydia). Anal infections were associated with receptive UAI (p for trend 0.001 for both anal gonorrhoea and chlamydia) and other receptive anal sexual practices. Stratified analyses showed the independence of the associations of insertive oral sex with urethral infections and of non-intercourse receptive anal practices with anal infections. CONCLUSION: Incident gonorrhoea and chlamydia were common. Risk behaviours for both urethral and anal infections were not restricted to UAI. Screening that includes tests for anal and urethral infections should be considered for all sexually active homosexual men, not just for those who report UAI.